with the Holy Ghost; Christ did not baptize, nor with water, because he was to baptize with the Holy Ghost. The water-baptism, then, of John, was typical of the Spirit-baptism of Christ, and water, the medium of the baptism of John, was analogous to the Holy Ghost, the medium of the baptism of Christ. So far, therefore, from introducing a real difference into the office of John, compared with the office of Christ, this distinction brings them nearer to a resemblance than before; making the Baptist so exactly the counterpart of Christ, that even that most important part in the functions of the latter, the mission and effusion of the Holy Ghost, is not without its significant prototype in the functions of the former. And this may be one reason why the baptism of John, though, as conveyed by the same external medium, but destitute of the same inward grace, it might so far appear the appropriate emblem of Christian baptism in general, should be considered in reality no type, or similitude, of that sacrament, but only of the one baptism, once for all administered, at the day of Pentecost, by Christ himself, upon the first Christian converts, in the communication of the extraordinary graces of the Spirit-and afterwards, as often as those graces were repeated, upon all converts subsequently.

I am led to these considerations partly by the testimony of John himself, who, on a variety of occasions, so distinguishes his own baptism from some baptism of Christ's, as shews him to have had none other baptism in view, but this: I, indeed, have baptized you in water, but he shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost ": and, what is still more to the purpose, because it was literally fulfilled at the day of Pentecost, when the Spirit visibly descended in the likeness of tongues of fire: I, indeed, am baptizing you in water— but he shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost, and in fire ° : partly, by the testimony of our Lord himself, who, as if expressly to remind the Apostles of the typical baptism, which they had heretofore received at the hands of John, tells them on the way to Bethany, before his ascension, John,

indeed, baptized in water, but ye shall be baptized in the Holy Ghost, not many days hence P: a declaration, which St. Peter afterwards applies to a case in point—the effusion of the Spirit on Cornelius and his household, even before they had been baptized with water 9: partly, from the testimony of St. Paul, with respect to the twelve Disciples at Ephesus: John, indeed, baptized with baptism of repentance, telling the people that they should believe upon him who was coming after him, that is, upon Jesus, the Christ. For this was to imply that John had baptized with water, as the sign and seal of repentance, but Christ should baptize with the Spirit, as the sign and seal of acceptance and the event gave effect to his words; for, as soon as these disciples had been baptized in the name of the Lord, and Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost also was poured on them, and they spake with tongues. Nor is it improbable, that among the other uses proposed by the baptism of our Lord himself, to prefigure this future truth might be one; for, after the water had been poured over him by John, the Holy Ghost was poured on him from above, and not only was poured upon him, but rested on him, and continued with him. And if Justin Martyr is to be believed, even a more sensible indication of the same truth was at the same time given. Kaì tóte, ἐλθόντος τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰορδάνην ποταμὸν, ἔνθα ὁ Ἰωάννης ἐβάπτιζε, κατελθόντος τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ ὕδωρ, καὶ πῦρ ἀνήφθη ἐν τῷ Ἰορδάνῃ, καὶ, κ. τ. λ.

The same tradition is said to have been contained in the gospel according to the Ebionitest; between which, however, and this allusion to it by Justin, there is so much of difference in the circumstances, as to prove that the latter did not take it from the former. But, whatever may be thought of this fact, the baptism of John, which had just preceded, might be typical of that spiritual unction which followed; and both together might concur to intimate that he, who had received not only the thing signified but the sign, if he S Dialog. 331. t Epiph.

P Acts i. 5. Oper. i. 137. 138.

q xi. 16.

r xix. 4.

baptized at all, would baptize not with water, but with the Spirit; and, having received so plenteous, and withal so enduring, an unction, that he should baptize with the Spirit. For it was in reference to the plenteousness of that effusion, that John afterwards said to his disciples: The Father giveth not the Spirit by measure"-and in reference to the derived communications, bestowed on the church, from the same inexhaustible source, that the Evangelist, at the beginning of his Gospel, declared, Of his fulness have all we received, and grace in return for grace; that is, grace imparted, in return for grace received v.

The identity of the ministry of John, and of the ministry of Jesus Christ, in general, may be further confirmed as follows.

W

I. By the exordium of St. Mark's Gospel, 'Agxǹ To EỦαYγελίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὡς γέγραπται ἐν τοῖς προφήTais", x. 7. λ. The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was, consequently, the beginning of the ministry of John ; and the part, subsequently discharged in the same Gospel by Jesus Christ, was similar to the part, which had been previously discharged in it by John. Nor is it possible to evade this conclusion, except by contending that rò evayyéλov ’Inσοῦ Χριστοῦ means here no more than the tidings of the approach and manifestation of Jesus Christ; a sense, which, by limiting the gospel entirely to the supposed ministry of John, in this one respect, would lead to the absurd inference that Jesus Christ himself bore no part in the Gospel at all, and would contradict the writer to the Hebrews: П~ç ἡμεῖς ἐκφευξόμεθα τηλικαύτης ἀμελήσαντες σωτηρίας; ἥτις ἀρχὴν λαβοῦσα λαλεῖσθαι διὰ τοῦ Κυρίου, ὑπὸ τῶν ἀκουσάντων εἰς ἡμᾶς ἐβεβαιώθη *.

II. By the true drift and meaning of the reply to the question, Εν ποίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ ταῦτα ποιεῖς "; the peculiarity of which reply consists in this, that while it appears to decline, it does, in reality, answer, the question. Our Lord, indeed, foreknew that his interrogators would not reply to his own

vi. 16.

"John iii. 34.

wi. J.

x ii. 3.

question-from heaven; and that they durst not reply to it-from men: he foreknew, therefore, that they would not reply to it at all; and this is the reason why he encounters their question by another. But, suppose them to have answered, what was certainly possible, that the Baptism of John was

oupavou; then, on one implicit admission, viz. that the ministry of our Saviour also was the same in kind with the ministry of John, they would have answered their question for themselves. If John's ministry was from heaven, our Saviour's was so too: and he, who acted by a divine commission, had the clearest right to do those things.

III. By a comparison of Matt. xi. 12. 13. with Luke xvi. 16: the first of which ought to be rendered thus; From the days of John the Baptist, even until now, the kingdom of heaven is suffering violence, and violent ones are seizing on it by force: for all the Prophets, and the Law, taught until John: and the second, delivered on a different and a much later occasion, in like manner, thus; The Law and the Prophets taught until John; since then, the kingdom of heaven is preaching of, and every one is pressing into it. So rendered, and taken in conjunction, the figurative language of each of these passages describes the efforts of men, not yet in possession, but striving with all their might and main to get possession, of some desirable object. It would aptly, for example, personify the exertions of soldiers, who having the reduction, and the spoiling, of some rich, but fortified, place before them, are employing all the arts and expedients of war to take it; are scaling the walls, battering the gates, undermining, and throwing down, every obstacle which keeps them, for a time, from their prize.

It is not, then, implied that the kingdom of heaven was as yet subdued by this holy warfare, or that the violence of these figurative spoilers was actually crowned with success: only that it was on the point of becoming so: and the language of prophecy, which speaks of the future as already present, describes it accordingly even now. But that it does this in conformity to its own idiom merely, appears

from the fact that the kingdom of heaven, all the time, sayyexiera, is still only preached of, and announced, though every one was pressing into it. The truth is, the very tidings, or news, of its approach were themselves the producing causes of this eagerness to press into it, of this violence exerted to get possession of it: and the publication of those tidings had begun with John. The welcome, the eagerness, the impatience, with which the news had been received, and the approach of the kingdom was already expected, were, consequently, all to be dated from the commencement of the ministry of John: but the same feelings continued to be still kept up (and that the more, the longer the arrival of the kingdom itself seemed to be delayed) since the commencement of the ministry of Christ.

The ministry of John, therefore, was the same in kind with the ministry of Christ, and merely prior in the order of time to that; which being the case, it follows directly that the ministry of John, compared with the ministry of any prophet who had gone before him, was something novel and sui generis. It might be justly said that the Law and the Prophets had all prophesied, or taught, as before, until John appeared; but that, since then, the kingdom of heaven-a new dispensation, distinct from the Mosaic, though raised up and nourished in the bosom of the Mosaic-had begun, and was continuing, to be preached. The reign of the ancient dispensation, the authority of the former rule of faith, were first superseded by the advent, and the ministry, of John. He might be said to have stood on the middle wall of partition between the Law and the Gospel; and to have belonged alike to each-consummating the one, and introducing the other. He was neither the last in the order of the Prophets, nor the first in the order of the Apostles; but something made up of both. As appearing before the Messias, he might be classed with the Prophets of the Law; and as sustaining the same office with the Messias, he might be classed with the emissaries of the Gospel: and, on all these accounts, while he might